RAM DHARI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Ram Dhari has come up in the present petition seeking quashing of the adverse entry in the ACR for the period w.e.f 1.4.2006 to 31.3.2007 issued vide letter dated 27.8.2007 (Annexure P-21) order dated 28.1.2009 (Annexure P-25) passed by respondent no.2 and order dated 16.7.2015 (Annexure P-28) issued by respondent no.4 vide which, the petitioner was served with three months notice for retirement from service as provided under Rule 3.26 (d) of Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume-I, Part-I read with 9.18 (i)(C) of PPR Volume-I and order dated 2.10.2015 (Annexure P-31) issued by respondent no.4, whereby he was retired from service w.e.f 16.10.2015 (A.N).

(2.) The petitioner was recruited in the Haryana Police on 7.11986 as Constable and was promoted up to the rank of Sub Inspector. The petitioner was also awarded the President Medal on the occasion of Republic Day 2005. The petitioner was conveyed the adverse entry in the ACR for the period 01.4.2006 to 31.3.2007 vide letter dated 27.8.2007 (Annexure P-21). This entry reflected his honesty to be doubtful. Against this adverse entry in the ACR for the period 01.04.2006 to 31.3.2007, the petitioner filed a representation dated 28.9.2007 (Annexure P-22) before respondent no.3, which was rejected vide order dated 28.5.2008 (Annexure P-23). Another representation dated 27.6.2008 (Annxure P-24) was given to respondent no.2, which was also rejected vide order dated 28.1.2009 (Annexure P-25). Finally he submitted representation dated 17.3.2009 (Annexure P-26) before respondent no.1. However, the petitioner was asked to appear before respondent no.1 on 9.6.2014 vide letter dated 15.2014 (Annexure P-27). Thereafter vide order dated 16.7.2015 (Annexure P-28), the petitioner was served with three months notice for retirement from service and finally vide impugned order dated 10.2015 (Annexure P-31), he was retired from service.

(3.) On notice, joint written statement was filed by Superintendent of Police, Jind on behalf of respondents no. 1 to 4. It has been submitted therein that the petitioner was reported adversely in the ACR for the period from 1.4.2006 to 31.2007 against the column of integrity etc. (Annexure P-7) which was conveyed to the petitioner by the Inspector General of Police, Hisar Range vide letter dated 27.8.2007 (Annexure P-21). On the representation of the petitioner regarding adverse remarks, comments of the reporting officer were obtained by the Inspector General of Police, Hisar Range, Hisar. The Inspector General of Police, Hisar Range, Hisar vide his letter dated 4.10.2007 sent his detailed comments. As per the comments of the Reporting Officer, the adverse remarks in the ACR for the period from 1.4.2006 to 31.2007 were recorded in the ACR of the petitioner on the basis of very careful and objective assessment of over all functioning of the petitioner during the period under report. The representation was rejected as the petitioner was found dishonest with regard to his work. The stand taken by the respondents with regard to representation (Annexure P-26) was that no second representation is maintainable against an adverse ACR and reference was made to Instructions dated 22.1971 issued by the State Govt. which are reproduced as under:-